@article{TorranceNottbuschAlvesetal.2017,
  author    = {Torrance, Mark and Nottbusch, Guido and Alves, Rui A. and Arfe, Barbara and Chanquoy, Lucile and Chukharev-Hudilainen, Evgeny and Dimakos, Ioannis and Fidalgo, Raquel and Hyona, Jukka and Johannesson, Omar I. and Madjarov, George and Pauly, Dennis Nikolas and Uppstad, Per Henning and van Waes, Luuk and Vernon, Michael and Wengelin, Asa},
  title     = {Timed written picture naming in 14 European languages},
  series = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society},
  volume    = {50},
  journal   = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1554-351X},
  doi       = {10.3758/s13428-017-0902-x},
  pages     = {744 -- 758},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {We describe the Multilanguage Written Picture Naming Dataset. This gives trial-level data and time and agreement norms for written naming of the 260 pictures of everyday objects that compose the colorized Snodgrass and Vanderwart picture set (Rossion \& Pourtois in Perception, 33, 217-236, 2004). Adult participants gave keyboarded responses in their first language under controlled experimental conditions (N = 1,274, with subsamples responding in Bulgarian, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Icelandic, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, and Swedish). We measured the time to initiate a response (RT) and interkeypress intervals, and calculated measures of name and spelling agreement. There was a tendency across all languages for quicker RTs to pictures with higher familiarity, image agreement, and name frequency, and with higher name agreement. Effects of spelling agreement and effects on output rates after writing onset were present in some, but not all, languages. Written naming therefore shows name retrieval effects that are similar to those found in speech, but our findings suggest the need for cross-language comparisons as we seek to understand the orthographic retrieval and/or assembly processes that are specific to written output.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KorochkinaBuerkiFoschiniNickels2021,
  author    = {Korochkina, Maria and B{\"u}rki-Foschini, Audrey Damaris and Nickels, Lyndsey},
  title     = {Apples and oranges},
  series = {Journal of memory and language : JML},
  volume    = {120},
  journal   = {Journal of memory and language : JML},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0749-596X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jml.2021.104246},
  pages     = {17},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Despite scarce empirical evidence, introducing new vocabulary in semantic categories has long been standard in second language teaching. We examined the effect of learning context on encoding, immediate recall and integration of new vocabulary into semantic memory by contrasting categorically related (novel names for familiar concepts blocked by semantic category) and unrelated (mixed semantic categories) learning contexts. Two learning sessions were conducted 24 hours apart, with each participant exposed to both contexts. Subsequently, a test phase examined picture naming, translation and picture-word interference tasks. Compared to the unrelated context, the categorically related context resulted in poorer naming accuracy in the learning phase, slower response latencies at the immediate recall tasks and greater semantic interference in the picture-word interference task (picture naming in L1 with semantically related novel word distractors). We develop a theoretical account of word learning that attributes observed differences to episodic rather than semantic memory.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FuhrmeisterMadecLorenzetal.2022,
  author    = {Fuhrmeister, Pamela and Madec, Sylvain and Lorenz, Antje and Elbuy, Shereen and B{\"u}rki Foschini, Audrey Damaris},
  title     = {Behavioural and EEG evidence for inter-individual variability in late encoding stages of word production},
  series = {Language, cognition and neuroscience},
  volume    = {37},
  journal   = {Language, cognition and neuroscience},
  number    = {7},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {2327-3798},
  doi       = {10.1080/23273798.2022.2030483},
  pages     = {902 -- 924},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Individuals differ in the time needed to name a picture. This contribution asks whether this inter-individual variability emerges in earlier stages of word production (e.g. lexical selection) or later stages (e.g. articulation) and examines the consequences of this variability for EEG group results. We measured participants' (N = 45) naming latencies and continuous EEG in a picture-word interference task and naming latencies in a delayed naming task. Inter-individual variability in naming latencies in immediate naming (in contrast with inter-item variability) was not larger than the variability in the delayed task, suggesting that some variability in immediate naming originates in later stages of word production. EEG data complemented this interpretation: Differences between relatively fast vs. slow speakers emerged in response-aligned analyses in a time window close to the vocal response. We additionally present a method to assess the generalisability of the timing of effects across participants based on random sampling.},
  language  = {en}
}